Managed Detection and Response cover Piergiorgio Venuti

Managed Detection and Response: a new preventive approach

Estimated reading time: 6 minutes

The constant use of communications over the network in a corporate context makes it essential to take precautions for computer security. As we have seen on other occasions, the dangers can come from different fronts: phishing , ransomware , data breach , etc. The implementation of new strategies such as Managed Detection and Response allows to mitigate risks and identify potential threats.

In this article, we’ll take a closer look at this new approach, focusing on advanced threats and the benefits of this new approach for businesses.

Managed Detection and Response security

Advanced-persistent-threats and SIEMs

A search of CardinalOPS , carried out on Fortune 1000 companies, highlights how companies using a system SIEM , however, encounter problems of cyber attacks. This is due, as Yair Manor, co-founder of CardinalOPS, in part to the visibility . Basically, the big companies have no real knowledge of the extent of their infrastructures and this leaves some openings from which it is possible to enter.

Systems with SIEM implementation, although they guarantee good IT security, are often mishandled by internal company technicians. Research shows that only 16% of standard threat protection techniques are actually applied by employees . Interesting data that show how an average of 25% of SIEM rules are violated or even never activated by security officers. It is therefore not easy to determine what are the best criteria to apply once the cyber attacks have occurred.

Among the 1000 companies surveyed, many of them invest considerable capital, in the billions of dollars, in order to identify the greatest number of correlations and events related to the corporate attack.

The process of constant improvement of SIEM systems underlines how this can be a real solution with a centralization and rationalization of the flow of incidents. In addition to choosing an effective security system, it is essential to have experienced technicians to be able to use the tools correctly.

Managed Detection Services & amp; Response: what are they

As noted in the previous lines, a SIEM-based system is effective, but not foolproof . In a situation where there is uncertainty of reliability, a new strategy is born to mitigate the risk. Specifically, there was the introduction of the Security Orchestration, Automation & amp; Response (SOAR) in SOCs, capable of automating repetitive workloads and detecting false positives. We also talked about it in a specific article in which we analyzed the advantages of this approach.

As it is easy to deduce, not all companies have implemented an efficient SOC system in their company, although it is now possible to find “ as a Service ” versions such as what we offer .

In this context, where the ability to identify the anomalous threat in the shortest possible time is essential, an innovative strategy is placed: Managed Detection & amp; Response (MDR) .

This service strategy is about identifying the threat as quickly as possible and containing it before it reaches its maximum level . There is therefore a change of approach due to the need to monitor potential threats around the clock. This is possible with a dedicated service capable of carrying out surveys 24 hours a day and for the whole week .

This approach implements an advanced, intelligent analysis aimed at reporting and solving the problem. Companies that choose our SOCaaS can take advantage of a service capable of speeding up the collection process and data analysis, freeing them from potential threats .

It should also be considered that the automation of the collection and analysis phases lowers maintenance prices for the company’s IT department. An advantage that cannot be ignored, offered by the decentralization of security services, such as SOCaaS from Cyberfero.

The advantages of MDR

In order to fully understand the potential of Managed Detection and Response, it is advisable to analyze the concrete benefits that individuals and companies find in this service.

Organizations using an MDR solution can immediately reduce detection time (and therefore response time). Threats can be identified in minutes, giving you the ability to take immediate action.

But reducing time-to-detect from months to minutes isn’t the only advantage of an MDR. Companies can also:

  • Increase resilience to potential attacks by optimizing the security configuration and eliminating rogue systems .
  • Identify and stop hidden and sophisticated threats through a continuous threat hunting .
  • Respond to threats more effectively and restore endpoints to a known state through guided response and managed remediation.
  • Redirect personnel from response work to reactive and repetitive incidents towards more strategic projects.

The incidence of ransomware

Companies know very well that one of the most difficult problems to eradicate within the corporate IT context, is the ransomware . A Managed Detection and Response strategy can defeat these threats and better manage phishing campaigns. Although employees may have a good background in cybersecurity, in many cases they are prone to trivial errors . In this regard, we recommend that you evaluate our ethical phishing service, to focus on training as a weapon against phishing .

Companies that do not have a dedicated team, in many cases manage cybersecurity with superficiality, belittling and underestimating the simplest cyber attacks. Being able to preventively eliminate a potential problem is a benefit that should not be underestimated, especially if you are bound to a continuous flow of incoming and outgoing data.

Managed Detection and Response cover

Prevention

The MDR strategy aims to prevent attacks and not to eradicate them once they are unassailable. Unfortunately, dealing with a cyber attack is particularly expensive, not only due to the difficulty of recovering the lost information, but also to restore its correct functioning.

A prevention service is the ideal answer to free yourself from potential dangers , protecting not only your company, but also the employees who can become victims in turn.

Conclusions: a concrete solution

Not all MDR services are identical to each other and it is advisable to rely on those who have been working for years and are committed to making this technology more and more effective.

The services offered by Cyberfero, such as SOCaaS, guarantee an ideal solution for every company . Thanks to the introduction of state-of-the-art security software and solutions, Cyberfero is in a position to offer a service aimed at the best possible prevention for corporate protection.

Customization and the choice of a dedicated service allow you to better manage company production. In an age when it is essential to protect yourself from cyber threats, a service dedicated to prevention is the smartest solution.

If you want to know how our solutions can help your business, do not hesitate to contact us, we will be happy to answer any questions.

Useful links:

SOAR: coordination for cyber security

SOAR: what it is and how it can be useful for companies

What is threat intelligence?

Use cases of a SOCaaS for companies part 2

Share


RSS

More Articles…

Categories …

Tags

RSS feed: Unknown Feed Unknown Feed

RSS feed: Full Disclosure Full Disclosure

  • Apache Struts2 Core Arbitrary Code Execution via OGNL Sandbox Escape November 2, 2026
    Posted by Daniel Owens via Fulldisclosure on Nov 01Description Apache Struts2 Core version 7.4.0 and below attempt to prevent arbitrary code execution via Object-Graph Navigation Language (OGNL) through several different mechanisms but only in a cursory fashion -- the libraries only guard against immediate calls evaluated by the OGNL engine via `SecurityMemberAccess`, but an allowed […]
  • Apache Struts2 Core TokenHelper Token Cryptographic Timing Side-Channel November 2, 2026
    Posted by Daniel Owens via Fulldisclosure on Nov 01Description The Apache Struts2 Core 7.4.0 and below performs session token comparisons cryptographically insecure early-exit comparison functions (e.g., `!=`, `memcmp`, byte-by-byte loops with `break`) that return as soon as the first mismatched byte is encountered. The execution time of the comparison is therefore proportional to the number […]
  • Apache Struts2 Spring Plugin Uses a Previously Closed Resource November 2, 2026
    Posted by Daniel Owens via Fulldisclosure on Nov 01Description The Apache Struts2 Spring Plugin opens a Spring `ApplicationContex` via a try-with-resources block and, outside of said block, then continues to use the closed resource, resulting in an uncaught `IllegalStateException`. This particular issue prevents proper functionality and indicates poor code quality and code review standards and […]
  • Apache Struts2 Core Integer Overflow November 2, 2026
    Posted by Daniel Owens via Fulldisclosure on Nov 01Description Apache Struts2 Core version 7.4.0 and below fails to properly prevent integer overflows, causing wrap-arounds and other issues on a downstream forced casting into types smaller than `BigInteger`. Importantly, this finding underscores why all applications using Struts and other such platforms should perform their own input […]
  • Apache Struts2 Core Cross-Origin Protection Exemption Miskeyed to a Deployment-Wide Path November 2, 2026
    Posted by Daniel Owens via Fulldisclosure on Nov 01Description Apache Struts2 Core version 7.4.0 and below's `FetchMetadataInterceptor`, `CoepInterceptor`, and `CoopInterceptor` each compare their `exemptedPaths` configuration -- a per-interceptor-reference, administrator-supplied set of paths intended to exempt specific actions from the corresponding cross-origin protection -- against `HttpServletRequest.getContextPath()`. `getContextPath()` is fixed for the entire deployed web...
  • Apache Struts2 REST Plugin Fails to Properly Parse Chunked Requests November 2, 2026
    Posted by Daniel Owens via Fulldisclosure on Nov 01Description The Apache Struts2 REST Plugin's (version 7.4.0 and below) `ContentTypeInterceptor.intercept(ActionInvocation)` only deserialises a request body and enforces the `struts.rest.content.maxLength` bound when `HttpServletRequest#getContentLength()` returns a positive value. `getContentLength()` returns `-1` whenever the `Content-Length` header is absent, which normal and appropriate for any Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP)...
  • Apache Struts2 REST Plugin Untrimmed `Accept` Header Tokens Break Content Negation Fallback November 2, 2026
    Posted by Daniel Owens via Fulldisclosure on Nov 01Description The Apache Struts2 REST Plugin's `DefaultContentTypeHandlerManager.getHandlerForResponse(HttpServletRequest, HttpServletResponse)` splits the `Accept` header on commas and passes each resulting token directly to `findHandler(String)` without trimming leading or trailing whitespace. `findHandler(String)` only retries a trimmed lookup when a token contains a semicolon (`;`), so a token that merely carries […]
  • Apache Struts2 JSON Plugin Insecure Deserialisation -- Object Deserialisation Element-Count Limit Bypass November 2, 2026
    Posted by Daniel Owens via Fulldisclosure on Nov 01As of the current versions of the Apache Struts2 JSON Plugin (e.g., version 7.4.0 and the 7.5.0 snapshot dated 28 October 2026), attackers can bypass the element-count limit purported to protect Object deserialisation added to said code as part of the WW-5618 and S2-072 "hardening controls". Please […]
  • [0day-rubbish] NETGEAR RAX120 V1.2.5.18 authenticated SOAP InstallApp OS command injection to root-configured web-stack execution (6.8 Medium; conditionally 7.2 High with management exposure) October 29, 2026
    Posted by disclosure via Fulldisclosure on Oct 280day Rubbish Research Team is publicly disclosing a vulnerability in NETGEAR RAX120 (Nighthawk AX12) firmware V1.2.5.18, the WiFi 6 consumer router from NETGEAR (United States), built on the Qualcomm IPQ8074 platform. The administrative web plane of this firmware generation is a lighttpd server fronting the vendor's DNI-framework CGI […]
  • [0day-rubbish] Raritan PX3 PDU G4 firmware 4.3.14 command injection in the ping and traceroute diagnostics through an inverted hostname-validation return check (8.8) October 29, 2026
    Posted by disclosure via Fulldisclosure on Oct 280day Rubbish Research Team is publicly disclosing a vulnerability in the Raritan PX3 PDU G4, firmware version 4.3.14, the intelligent rack power distribution unit from Raritan, a Legrand company (United States). A low-privilege authenticated session converts one diagnostics request into operating-system command execution in the product's web-service context, […]

Customers